|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 81 to 100 of 111 Records
-
1973 (7) TMI 31 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
" 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances stated in the statement of case, the income derived by letting oat the space on Ambalal (sic Jhaverbhai) Patel Bridge at Chowpatty is exempt from tax under section 4(3)(i) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances stated in the statement of case, the income from the advertisements on the said overbridge could be added as income of the assessee ? " - In that view of the matter, all the conditions necessary for claiming exemption under the provisions of section 4(3)(i) are fulfilled in the present case. Accordingly, we answer question No. 1 referred to us in the affirmative. In view of our answer to question No. 1 above, question No. 2 has to be answered in the negative
-
1973 (7) TMI 30 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Madras Agricultural Income Tax Act - Whether land held by the assessee or the land actually cultivated is relevant for assessment under Madras Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1955 for the purpose of section 10 of Madras Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1955 as it stood during the assessment year 1966-67 it is the extent of agricultural land actually held by the assessee that is relevant - Whether the land on which fodder is grown on commercial scale can be treated as pasture land
-
1973 (7) TMI 29 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Amounts credited to tariffs and dividends control reserve and contingency reserve - these reserves are required to be compulsorily made under the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 - appropriation to these funds are not voluntarily done by the assessee - Whether these amounts credited are deductible
-
1973 (7) TMI 28 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Transfer of capital assets to a person connected with the assessee for less than share market value of the assets- "(1) Whether the first proviso to section 12B(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, properly became applicable? - It must be observed that in the instant case it has not even been suggested that it is a case of under-statement of consideration in the transfer deed or that higher consideration than mentioned in the transfer deed was received by the transferors ; on the other hand, since the transfers were between close relations the object could be to make a gift of the shares to the transferees or having regard to the circuitous method adopted for effecting cross-transfers the object could be avoidance of liability under section 16(3) of the Act —Question answered in negative
-
1973 (7) TMI 27 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Assessee follows mercantile system of accounting - whether the liability to pay excise duty is allowable in the year in which the liability arose are in the year of payment - " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee was not entitled to deduction of Rs. 31,675 being the excise duty actually paid by it in 1962, on the ground that the liability therefor had arisen in 1952 ? "
-
1973 (7) TMI 26 - KERALA HIGH COURT
" (i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the sums of Rs. 2,90,220 and Rs. 3,63,750 were not assessable as income of the assessee for the assessment years 1960-61 and 1961-62 ? (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law and had material for holding that the sums of Rs. 2,90,220 and Rs.3,63,750 are exempt from taxation under section 4(3)(vii) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, for the assessment years 1960-61 and 1961-62, respectively ? " - the circumstances pointed out that the donors were interested in the assessee continuing to exercise his vocation. There is nothing personal in that. We, therefore, hold that these receipts arose from the exercise of an occupation by the assessee, excluded from the ambit of section 4(3)(vii). The two questions referred to us have, therefore, to be answered in the negative, that is, in favour of the department and against the assessee
-
1973 (7) TMI 25 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Penalty proceedings were taken under section 271(1) of the Act and the penalty amount was computed on the total tax assessed but not on the balance tax payable - Whether penalty under section 271(1) is to be computed on total tax assessed or tax actually payable - held that it should not to be calculated on the total tax assessed
-
1973 (7) TMI 24 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Validity of notice u/s 138 - In the balance sheet filed with the original returns, sale of machinery was shown with a note that profit or loss by that transaction was yet to be ascertained - This explanation was accepted in the original assessment. Whether notice under section 148 could be issued on the plea that the profit by sale was not disclosed
-
1973 (7) TMI 23 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Amounts spent to replace worn out corrugated sheets on the roof of a building from which the assessee derived lease rentals - " Whether there was any material to justify the finding of the Tribunal that any portion of the expenditure incurred by the assessee was of a capital nature ? " As stated earlier, whether there is a material alteration or improvement would depend upon the facts of each case and in the absence of material on record that asbestos cement sheet roof is costlier or otherwise more advantageous than the roof of corrugated iron sheets, it cannot be said that the expenses incurred can be regarded as those of a capital nature - Question answered in the negative
-
1973 (7) TMI 22 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Grandfather made gifts to grandsons - Father also made gifts to sons equally - " Whether Tribunal was right in holding that 660 shares belonged to the assessee's Hindu undivided family and, therefore, the income therefrom was not taxable in the hands of the assessee in the status of an individual ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax was justified in reducing the interest income from Rs. 13,352 to Rs. 6,157 ? " " Questions answered in the affirmative
-
1973 (7) TMI 21 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
" 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to a set-off in respect of the loss determined under section 10 of the Act including unabsorbed depreciation of Rs. 37,103 relating to the assessment years 1957-58 and 1958-59 and pertaining to the business carried on by him as sole proprietor against his share of income for assessment years 1959-60 and 1960-61 from the same business converted into partnership firms, consisting of himself and his sons ? - question referred to us is answered in the negative
-
1973 (7) TMI 20 - PATNA HIGH COURT
Computing the total income - father settled property for minor's benefit - the income vested in trustees and the minor was not getting any benefit in the relevant year - " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Rs. 2,412 should have been included in the total income of the assessee in the relevant year under section 16(3)(b) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ? " – Held, no - it is clear that although the income was in the hands of the trustees no part of it was either actually received by the minor daughter of the assessee nor did it accrue to her nor she derived any benefit out of the income in the hands of the trustees
-
1973 (7) TMI 19 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Settlement of damages for breach of contract after expiry of contract - Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the loss of Rs. 11,100 was sustained by the assessee in speculative business within the meaning of Explanation 2 to section 28 read with sub-section (5) of section 43 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? - held that Settlement of damages for breach of contract does not amount to speculative transaction as it is not settling a contract
-
1973 (7) TMI 18 - MYSORE HIGH COURT
Penalty under section 271(1)(a) - rejection of assessee's explanation for the delay in filing return - since there was no material to hold that the assessee had deliberately failed to submit its return within the prescribed time limit or that its conduct was contumacious or dishonest, penalty is not leviable
-
1973 (7) TMI 17 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Petitioner was assessed by the respondent, the Income-tax Officer, under section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, fixing his total income to the best of judgment - Whether the assessee should be given an opportunity to explain the material gathered by the Income-tax Officer in an ex-parte assessment – validity of assessment - It is clear from the above provision that before the amount of the undisclosed investment is included in the total income of an assessee, he is entitled to an opportunity to explain it. The petitioner's case attracts the application of section 69 of the Act. The Income-tax Officer was, therefore, bound to give an opportunity to the petitioner to explain about the nature and source of his investment before that was treated as his income. I quash the impugned order of assessment, and remit the case to the respondent for being disposed of according to law
-
1973 (7) TMI 16 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
New Industrial Undertaking - Deemed Dividend - Development Rebate Reserve - Rectification notices under section 154
-
1973 (7) TMI 15 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Capital Gains - assessee is a Hindu undivided family deriving income from interest on securities, dividends, property and dealing in shares, both ready and forward - Shares in the new company received by the assessee on the basis of his share holdings in the old company. Whether it amounts to exchange or relinquishment for the purpose of capital gains - as a result of allotment of 45 shares of New Shorrock company under the scheme of amalgamation to the assessee by reason of his holding of 90 shares of Shorrock company, neither a transaction of exchange nor relinquishment has taken place
-
1973 (7) TMI 14 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Return of income for the assessment year 1963-64 filed in 1966 showed income less than 80 per cent. of the assessed income - "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the Explanation to section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is not applicable to this case?" - furnishing of inaccurate particulars was after the amendments - penalty would be justified
-
1973 (7) TMI 13 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Petitioner did not file his returns on the due dates, but he filed the same on 16th December, 1969, pursuant to notices issued to him under section 17(2) in respect of the first four assessment years and under section 14(2) for the assessment year 1968-69 - Whether the assessee's bona fide belief that wealth-tax would not be leviable if market value instead of 20 times the rent was considered forms a reasonable excuse for non-filing of return of wealth - since the assessee did not file the returns voluntarily, he is not entitled to the relief u/s 18(2A)
-
1973 (7) TMI 12 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
This appeal is by the revenue and it is directed against the judgment and order of quashing notices under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - When the Income-tax Officer does not disclose the material on which he had formed his belief for reopening the assessment, whether reassessment notice would be valid
|
